01-16-2007, 01:13 PM
Quote:The Gallo-Romans certainly continued to speak Celtic, right into Late Roman times, as Hieronymus and Sidonius Appolinaris testify. So maybe that *could* also have happened in Britain?
Hi Vortigern,
It did, Celtic languages continued to be spoken in the British Isles. They still are in some parts. But, as the germanic/celtic lingusitic border moved south in Gaul, the border moved west in the british isles.
The situation in Gaul is of course more complicated as Gallic gave way to French eventually but in areas dominated by a military elite only, such as the Burgundian kingdom based on Lyons, germanic speakers were insufficient in numbers and their language was lost.
Switzerland is an interesting case. Burgundians were insufficient in numbers to impose their language in the Suisse Romande or Welschland, yet the Alemanni were able to impose their language in much of Switzerland.
One argument often made for Gaul is that a military elite made use of existing institutions, such as the church, which had remained more or less intact. Using such institutions was made easier by adopting the language of the institution.
The situation with the church in Britain is very interesting. The most Christianised part of Roman Britain was the south east with scant evidence of christianisation in the west. However, by the end of the 6th cent., the situation is reversed. Whether this is the result of the church and the congregation moving west, or the church only, is unknown. The important point is that, in Britain, the church moved whereas in Gaul, it didn't.
best
harry Amphlett
Harry Amphlett
